ShareThis Page

Mother who ignored deal to vaccinate son to share custody; son vaccinated

| Thursday, Oct. 12, 2017, 11:03 a.m.
Rebecca Bredow talks to the media outside of Oakland County Circuit Judge Karen McDonald's courtroom Wednesday, Oct. 11, 2017, in Pontiac, Mich. McDonald ruled to reduce the child custody rights of Bredow, who was jailed for five days for not following through on an agreement to vaccinate her 9-year-old son.  (John Wisely /Detroit Free Press via AP)
Rebecca Bredow talks to the media outside of Oakland County Circuit Judge Karen McDonald's courtroom Wednesday, Oct. 11, 2017, in Pontiac, Mich. McDonald ruled to reduce the child custody rights of Bredow, who was jailed for five days for not following through on an agreement to vaccinate her 9-year-old son. (John Wisely /Detroit Free Press via AP)

PONTIAC, Mich. — A Michigan judge has reduced the child custody rights of a woman who was jailed for five days for not following through on an agreement to vaccinate her 9-year-old son.

Oakland County Judge Karen McDonald ruled Wednesday that Rebecca Bredow will no longer have primary custody of the boy but will have joint custody with her ex-husband, James Horne.

Horne wanted the boy vaccinated and Bredow agreed to do so last November but didn't. She says vaccinations go against her religious beliefs.

McDonald found Bredow in contempt of court last week and ordered her jailed. She also granted temporary custody to Horne and ordered the boy to be vaccinated. He received four immunizations on Monday.

Bredow told reporters Wednesday she was “in shock” by the court's decision. Her attorney plans to appeal.

TribLIVE commenting policy

You are solely responsible for your comments and by using TribLive.com you agree to our Terms of Service.

We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.

While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.

We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers

We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.

We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.

We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.

We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.